I was gonna get all hot and bothered over Bill Simmons' (a.k.a the Sports Guy at ESPN.com) recent comments about the value of blogs in his exchange with fellow author Chuck Klosterman, but he really didn't say anything that awful. First of all it was Klosterman who really let it rip, and I don't believe he was directing his comments at sports blogs specifically. And Simmons, for his part, qualified his statement against blogging:
I'm not killing all blogs here -- some of them are useful because they find me stories that I couldn't find on my own, and some of their comments or features make me laugh and think. When the goal is to keep everyone on their toes, have some fun, provide an alternate take on things and remain at least somewhat objective, that's great. If you're using a blog to constantly ream everyone else, that's depressing.
I'm not sure who he's reading, but he's not looking very hard if he finds that many 'depressing' type blogs, especially among those covering the NBA.
I remember sensing a little resentment towards blogs from Simmons in previous articles of his, but I can't pinpoint it.(I guess this is the kind unsubstantiated speculation that causes Klosterman's ire towards 'new media' ) But I'll say this: if Simmons truly feels that blogs have nothing to offer he's pretty out of touch. Check out this response by 'The Mighty MJD', who fully says what I'm trying to get at.(Via SacKingsBlog)
And I still don't know why he didn't just hire a good blogger to maintain his 'daily links', and spare us the months-long yawn fest that was his intern search.